alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 55204.

#### Leading Forwarders, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 156548-K (B), etc. (New York).

*354Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the Federal Reserve bank certified dual rates of exchange for the currencies involved in the liquidation of the entries for the dates of exportation of the merchandise covered by the entries and that the circumstances relating to the liquidation of the said entries are similar in all material respects to those in Abstract 54732. In view of this stipulation and following the cited decision it was held that the currencies of the invoices covered by certain enumerated entries should have been converted in the manner directed by the judgment of this court in said Abstract 54732, in accordance with Bureau of Customs Circular Letter No. 2675, dated October 19, 1949.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 3409

_____________________________
J.H.
, Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Jackson County

. Christopher N. Patterson , Judge

. April 2, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. W OLF , K ELSEY , and W INOKUR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Jasmine Q. Russell
, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney Gener al, and Benjamin L. Hoffman
, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-2717

___________________________

Jessie Samuel Rufus Benford

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Schneider National Carriers, Inc.

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis

 ____________

 Submitted: January 5, 2022

Filed: January 10, 2022

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, KELLY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

In this employment discrimination case, Jessie Benford appeals following the

district court’s1

 denial of his motion for summary judgment and grant of summary

1The Honorable Matthew T. Schelp, United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Missouri.
judgment in favor of his former employer. After careful review of the record and the

parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that the grant of summary judgment was

proper for the reasons stated by the district court. See Banks v. John Deere & Co.,

829 F.3d 661, 665 (8th Cir. 2016) (reviewing grant of summary judgment de novo). 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

-2-
No. 46080.

#### Protests 865581-G, etc., of H. A. Mack & Co. (Boston).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Arconti*v. *United States*(T. D. 49573) the earthenware in question was held dutiable at 20 percent under paragraph 210 as claimed.
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 1 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 2 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 3 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 4 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 5 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 6 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 7 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 8 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 9 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 10 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 11 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 12 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 13 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 14 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 15 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 16 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 17 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 18 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 19 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 20 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 21 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 22 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 23 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 24 of 25
Case 2:05-cv-04591-MMB Document 1 Filed 08/30/05 Page 25 of 25
9084 Overland Plaza 

St. Louis, MO 63114 

314-426-6111 

314-426-9097 ^._ . ^ _^ ,, ,„„ 

erika@murrays-travel.com ;.;,-"I \ji- ;; :,jl'Uill/iUUi^ 

March 9. 2010 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

Secretary 

United States Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Wastiington, D.C. 

20590 

SubjectrHaneda C(mibmatron Services^AltocanonTroceeding DtJT-OSr-2010-OOtJr 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

As a dedicated travel partner of American Airlines, I am writing in support of American's 

application to provide new service from New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport and Los 

Angeles International Airport to Tokyo International Airport at Haneda. 

1 recognize and applaud you and the Obama administration for your success last December in 

reaching a landmark Open Skies agreement with Japan, which opens up Haneda to service by U.S. 

airlines. 

1 encourage youi' selection of American Airlines to provide nonstop service from New York and Los 

Angeles to Haneda in order to provide an essential connection between three of the world's largest 

financial and commerce centers. 

Recent events, including the successful preservation of Japan Airlines' oneworld Alliance 

membership, have underscored American's strong commitment to the trans-Pacific market. 

American is likewise committed to New York and Los Angeles - both vital focal points of business, 

trade, entertainment, teclinology and education - providing unsurpassed air service since the mid1900s 

Both the New York and Los Angeles metro areas will gain significant economic benefits from these 

proposed new flights, as will American's customers and employees. However, we need your help 

to make the JFK & LAX/Haneda connection a reality. 

Therefore. 1 strongly urge you to say yes to American Airlines and its request for slots to fly from 

Kennedy and Los Angeles to Haneda!
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3992 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3992

To prohibit the Administrator of the Small Business Administration from 
   directly making loans under the 7(a) loan program, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 20, 2024

 Mr. Scott of South Carolina (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Risch, Mr. 
Cramer, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Daines, Mr. Lankford, Ms. Ernst, Mr. Cornyn, 
 Mr. Budd, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Braun, and Mr. Crapo) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
            Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit the Administrator of the Small Business Administration from 
   directly making loans under the 7(a) loan program, and for other 
                               purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting Access to Credit for 
Small Businesses Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON DIRECT 7(A) LOANS.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any provision of subsection (a) of 
section 7 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a)), the 
Administrator of the Small Business Administration may not directly 
make a loan pursuant to such subsection.
    (b) Existing Loans.--The Administrator of the Small Business 
Administration shall service a direct loan made under section 7(a) of 
the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a)) if such loan was made before 
the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Scenario

Treasury-Managed
Trust Fund

Allocation

Accounts



Scenario

Trust Funds
with Contract
Authority —

Part Il

Transfers of
Contract Authority



Scenario

Trust Fund
Investments



Scenario

Trust Fund
Appropriation
Transfers for

Specific Treasury
Appropriation
Fund Symbols



Scenario

Basic
Trust Fund
Accounting



Scenario

Trust Funds
with Contract
Authority —

Part I

Appropriations

to Liquidate
Contract Authority-
Funded by
Nonexpenditure
Transfers



Scenario

Trust Fund
Balances
Precluded

from Obligation



Scenario

Trust Fund
Receipts
Available for

Investment
but not
Obligation
No. 56379.

protests 904717-G (A), etc. (New York).

#### W. T. Grant Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the cited authorities the claims of the plaintiff were sustained as follows: (1) Certain items of the merchandise the same in all material respects as the gloves the subject of *United States*v. *Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333), were held dutiable at 50 percent under the provision in paragraph 915 for gloves “made of fabric knit on other than a warp-knitting machine,” plus any additional duty applicable under paragraph 924; and (2) other items similar to those involved in *May Co. et al.*v. *United States*(25 C. C. P. A. 227, T. D. 49336) were held dutiable at 25 percent under said paragraph 915 as gloves, made in chief value of woven 'cotton fabric, plus any additional duty applicable under paragraph 924. In all other respects the protests were overruled.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4016 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 610
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4016

 To amend the Boulder Canyon Project Act to authorize the Secretary of 
the Interior to expend amounts in the Colorado River Dam fund, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 21, 2024

 Ms. Sinema (for herself, Ms. Cortez Masto, Mr. Kelly, Ms. Rosen, Mr. 
Padilla, and Ms. Butler) introduced the following bill; which was read 
  twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

                           November 21, 2024

               Reported by Mr. Manchin, with an amendment
  [Omit the part struck through and insert the part printed in italic]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Boulder Canyon Project Act to authorize the Secretary of 
the Interior to expend amounts in the Colorado River Dam fund, and for 
                            other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Help Hoover Dam Act''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION TO EXPEND AMOUNTS.

    Section 2 of the Act of December 21, 1928 (43 U.S.C. 617, et seq.; 
commonly known as the ``Boulder Canyon Project Act''), is amended by 
adding at the end the following:
    ``(f) The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to expend moneys 
in the fund, including moneys in account XXXR5656P1, that were and 
hereafter are recovered on a non-reimbursable basis, for any authorized 
activity, including operations, maintenance, investigation and cleanup 
actions, and capital improvements, within the Boulder Canyon Project at 
Hoover Dam or on land used for the construction and operation of the 
Hoover Dam, subject to the review and approval of in consultation with 
the Boulder Canyon Project contractors as identified in the Hoover 
Power Allocation Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-72).''.
                                                       Calendar No. 610

118th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 4016

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To amend the Boulder Canyon Project Act to authorize the Secretary of 
the Interior to expend amounts in the Colorado River Dam fund, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           November 21, 2024

                       Reported with an amendment
```
No. 50919.

#### Protests 56076-K, etc., of Michaels, Stern & Co. et al. (New York)

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83, decided February 5, 1945.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries involved. The protests were sustained to this extent.
# United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 13

- 597 C

October 4 , 2013

_________________________ _______ __ __ _ 

### TRC GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC.

,

Plaintiff

, Subject

- matter jurisdiction



### v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

_

_________________________ ___ ____ _



### OPINION AND ORDER

Block, Judge.

Plaintiff filed this bid protest seeking to enjoin the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) from procuring relocation services under Blanket Purchase Agreements (“BPAs”) awarded to plaintiff’s competitors. The FBI has announced that it plans to conduct a new procurement to replace the challenged BPAs. The awardees are challenging this “corrective action” in two consolidated protests pending before the court, in which plaintiff is participating

as a defendant

- in tervenor. See WHR Group, Inc. v. United States , 13

- cv

- 515; Lexicon Gov’t Services, LLC v. United States , 13

- cv

- 545

. Plaintiff’s protest is materially the same as Brookfield Relocation Inc. v. United States

, 13

- cv

- 592. As in Brookfield , plaintiff and defe ndant agree that the challenged BPAs are invalid and that the FBI should not procure relocation services under them. But for the WHR and

Lexicon protests, defendant would have already taken corrective action to replace the allegedly invalid BPAs. Thus, a s in Brookfield , plaintiff and defendant have the same interests and there exists no justiciable case or controversy between them.

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the court’s opinion in Brookfield , issued earlier this day, plaintiff’s protest is DISMISSED , without prejudice, for lack of subject

- matter jurisdiction. The Clerk shall take the necessary steps to dismiss this matter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s 

# / Lawrence J. Block

Lawrence J. Block Judge
No. 65445.

#### Fisherman’s Cooperative Assn. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/21584, etc. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fish netting similar in all material respects to that involved in Abstract 63947, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
The Court will mold the judgment and treble the 1

compensatory damages, for an award of $12,149,223.00 in favor of

Plaintiffs. Moreover, the Court will grant this motion and hold

Steven Hirsh and Lolo, Inc. liable under the judgement. 

Goldberg, Miller & Rubin, P.C. will have to provide, at 2

a later date, an updated affidavit demonstrating that the

attorneys’ billing rates and hours spent are within community

standards and that the legal work was reasonable and necessary. 

Defendants will be given an opportunity to object before the

Court rules on the amount of the fee. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE : CIVIL ACTION

INSURANCE CO. et al., : NO. 05-5368

:

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

ARNOLD LINCOW et al., :

:

Defendants. :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 2nd day of June, 2010, it is hereby

ORDERED that: 

1. Defendants’ motion for post trial relief (doc. no.

613) is DENIED.

2. Plaintiffs’ motion to alter and amend the judgment

(doc. no. 615) is GRANTED. 

1

3. Plaintiffs’ motion for attorneys’ fees (doc. no.

616) is GRANTED. 

2

4. Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a reply (doc.

no. 955) is GRANTED. 

5. Plaintiffs’ motion to strike (doc. no. 958) is
The motion is granted to the extent Plaintiffs move for 3

leave to file a surreply to Mintz’s reply brief. The motion is

denied to the extent Plaintiffs move to strike Mintz’s second

reply brief. 

-2-

GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. 

3

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

 S/Eduardo C. Robreno 

 EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, J.
**Exhibit 32.2****Certification of Chief Financial Officer**     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, theundersigned officer of Terayon Communication Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) herebycertifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:     (i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March31, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and     (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated:May 10, 2007        /s/ Mark A. Richman     Mark A. Richman    Chief Financial Officer and Senior    Vice President, Finance and    Administration  The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not beingfiled as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
Part 2

SUPPLEMENT

Line

No.

USSGLAcct. USSGL Account Title Begin/End Fed/NonFed Fund Type Reporting Type 

3.4 

USSGL Crosswalk - Reclassified Balance Sheet

Accounts Receivable, Capital Transfers (RC 12)/1

Bulletin No. 2015-04 DRAFT VI - 1
# sec5_scnp_2022

&L&"Arial"&10&BBulletin No. 2021-20	&"Arial,Bold"&10V SCNP - &P	&R&"Arial"&10&BAugust 2021
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND FOR THE YEAR THEN ENDED.  THIS
INFORMATION  IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO  SUCH  FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>

<S>                                   <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                    DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             12-MOS
<PERIOD-END>                         DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                 7,021,000
<SECURITIES>                           6,005,000
<RECEIVABLES>                          1,842,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                              123,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      15,192,000
<PP&E>                                   431,000
<DEPRECIATION>                           124,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        15,823,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    610,000
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                  57,000
<OTHER-SE>                            15,082,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          15,823,000
<SALES>                                5,555,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       5,555,000
<CGS>                                  3,167,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          5,520,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        53,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          356,000
<INCOME-TAX>                             149,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      207,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                             207,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                 0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                               0.04




</TABLE>
AFS-15-997-E 

December 28, 2015 

Mr. Michael Stewart 

Those Amazing Performers LLC 

DBA Team AeroDynamix 

110 Aviation Lane 

Gold Hill, NC 28071 

Dear Mr. Stewart: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption (and 

explains why we cannot process your request) from § 91.319(c) of Title 14 Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR). 

Why We Can Not Process Your Request 

You entered your petition for exemption on March 27, 2015, into public docket (No. FAA2015-0798) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Those 

Amazing Performers LLC, and doing business as (DBA) Team AeroDynamix, from 14 CFR 

§ 91.319(c). That exemption, if granted, would provide broad relief that would permit Those 

Amazing Performers LLC, DBA Team AeroDynamix, to conduct overflights of various 

stadiums and sporting events in aircraft having experimental certificates. 

14 CFR § 91.319(c) in part states that: 

“...no person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate over a 

densely populated area or in a congested airway. The Administrator may issue special 

operating limitations for particular aircraft to permit takeoffs and landings to be 

conducted over a densely populated area or in a congested airway, in accordance with 

terms and conditions specified in the authorization in the interest of safety in air 

commerce.” 

The FAA considers a stadium or sporting event to be an open air assembly of people subject 

to regulation under § 91.119(b). Many stadiums and sporting events, however, will also be 
2 

located around a densely populated area. In such cases, ingress, egress, and holding paths for 

stadium flyover events involving experimental aircraft would require an exemption from 

§ 91.319. 

In your petition, you did not provide the FAA with sufficient information about each flyover 

event (e.g. aircraft to be used, stadium to be overflown, geographical area surrounding the 

stadium) to know whether a particular flyover would involve flight over a densely populated 

area. As such, your petition for exemption provides insufficient information upon which the 

FAA could base a grant of exemption. Furthermore, a grant of exemption is an individualized 

assessment that involves a determination that an equivalent level of safety to that provided 

under the regulations can be maintained. Without specific information about each intended 

flyover event, the FAA cannot make this assessment. The FAA will not grant a general 

“blanket” authority for such flyovers, and we recommend that you file individualized 

petitions for exemption for each intended flyover event. 

In consideration of the forgoing, the FAA will take no further action on your request for 

exemption from 14 CFR § 91.319(c), and will close the docket on the petition. If you have 

any questions, you may call TJ Leahy, at (202) 267-0861, or email thomas.j.leahy@faa.gov.

 

Sincerely, 

//s// 

James M. Crotty 

Manager, Aircraft and Airport Rules Division 

Office of Rulemaking